Compilation Vol 3 Corrected (1-943).pmd - Goa Public Service ...

294
High Court gave directions on 22-2-94 in certain writ petitions and on other dates in other petitions,
that the direct recruits were appointed on various dates in 1994 as Assistant Engineers. Some direct
recruits were appointed much later.
9. The direct recruits filed the various SWPs 522/90, 227/97, 47/98, 1869/97,
824-B/94 challenging the ad hoc promotion of the Assistant Executive Engineers made by Government
without consulting the Service Commission beyond six months and contended that continuance of ad
hoc/stop gap promotion beyond six months (as per the order issued during 1987 to 1996) was non-
est and void and could not be subject of regularization. The seniority list cannot show these ad hoc
promotees as seniors to direct recruits. There is rota as well as quota. They sought the quashing of
existing seniority lists and they asked for issuing fresh seniority lists. On the other hand, the promotee
officers filed SMP. 98/93, 705/94 and 777/94 and in the two latter petitions, the seniority list dated
28-4-94 was questioned to the extent it was favourable to the direct recruits.
The High Level Committee :
Jammu & Kashmir PSC
10. Government appointed a High Level Committee on 21-5-97 to go into various issues arising
between the direct recruits and promotees. On the three issues referred, the Committee gave a Report
soon thereafter in 1997. It said that merely because the State Government could not make direct
recruitment due to inaction, the quota rule could not be said to have broken down. Thereafter, it
opined as follows : (1) as and when the direct recruitment was made, the direct recruits would be
entitled to placement of their seniority to the vacancies reserved for them as per the ratio. Similarly,
where the promotees came to be promoted in accordance with the rules “in excess of their quota”,
they could not be given seniority but should be given seniority only from the respective dates on which
vacancies in their quota were available : (ii) seniority had to be determined only “from the respective
dates on which their respective quota became available in a particular year”; (iii) ad hoc/stop gap
appointment would not entitle an individual to the benefit of seniority from the date of such ad hoc/stop
gap appointment”, such service not being according to rules. The period of officiation could not be
taken into account for seniority. The continuous length of ad hoc service could not be so counted.
The order dated 2-1-98 by Government regularizing promotees services without consulting P.S.C.:
11. Ignoring the above report of the above Committee, and without any recommendation of the
Public Service Commission for retrospective regularization, the Government issued, during the pendency